1. Af’idayani, N., Setiadi, I., & Fahmi. (2018).

The Effect of Inquiry Model on Science

Process Skills and Learning Outcomes. European Journal of Education Studies, 4(12),
177–182. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1344846
2. Aka, E. I., Güven, E., & Aydoğdu, M. (2010). Effect of problem solving method on
science process skills and academic achievement. Journal of Turkish Science
Education, 7(4), 13–25.
3. Alfiana, R., Parno, & Yogihati, C. I. (2021). Development of ILAU based on PBL-STEM
model with formative assessment as an opportunity to improve problem solving
skills in heat and temperature topics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1747(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1747/1/012005
4. Amin, T. G., Jeppsson, F., Haglund, J., & Strömdahl, H. (2012). Arrow of time:
Metaphorical construals of entropy and the second law of thermodynamics. Science
Education, 96(5), 818–848. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21015
5. Andersson, C., & Palm, T. (2017a). Characteristics of improved formative assessment
practice. Education Inquiry, 8(2), 104–122.
https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2016.1275185
6. Andersson, C., & Palm, T. (2017b). The impact of formative assessment on student
achievement : A study of the effects of changes to classroom practice after a
comprehensive professional development programme. Learning and Instruction, 49,
92–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.12.006
7. Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool
classroom : the teacher ’ s experience. European Early Childhood Education
Research Journal, 0(0), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2014.991099
8. Bain, K., Moon, A., Mack, M. R., & Towns, M. H. (2014). Research and Practice of
thermodynamics at the university level. 320–335.
https://doi.org/10.1039/c4rp00011k
9. Bao, T. Q., Khoa, C. T., Ngoc, N. T., Thu Ha, N. T., Hoan, V. Q., Quang, P. H., & Ha, C.
V. (2019). Teaching and Learning about Magnetic field and Electromagnetic
Induction Phenomena integrated Science, Technology, Engineering and
Mathematics (STEM) Education in Vietnamese high schools. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1340(1), 0–12. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1340/1/012031
10. Barrows, H. S., & Lynda, W. K. N. (2007). Principles and Practice of authentic
Problem-based Learning. Pearson Education South Asia.
11. Belland, B. R. (2010). Portraits of middle school students constructing evidence-
based arguments during problem-based learning: The impact of computer-based
scaffolds. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(3), 285–309.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9139-4
12. Besson, U., & De Ambrosis, A. (2014). Teaching Energy Concepts by Working on
Themes of Cultural and Environmental Value. Science and Education, 23(6), 1309–
1338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9592-7
13. Bezen, S., Aykutlu, I., & Bayrak, C. (2016). Conceptual comprehension of pre-service
physics teachers towards 1st law of thermodynamics. Journal of Turkish Science
Education, 13(1), 55–75. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10157a
14. Box, C. (2019). Formative Assessment in United States Classrooms. In Formative
Assessment in United States Classrooms. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03092-
6
15. Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What Is STEM?
A Discussion About Conceptions of STEM in Education and Partnerships. School
Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-
8594.2011.00109.x
16. Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science
studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science
education. Science Education, 92(3), 473–498. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20278
17. Bugarcic, A., Colthorpe, K., Zimbardi, K., Su, H. W., & Jackson, K. (2014). The
development of undergraduate science students’ scientific argument skills in oral
presentations. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics
Education, 22(5), 43–60.
18. Capraro, M. M., & Jones, M. (2013). Interdisciplinary STEM project-based learning.
STEM Project-Based Learning an Integrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) Approach, 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-143-
6_6
19. Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to Foster Scientific Literacy: A Review of
Argument Interventions in K-12 Science Contexts. Review of Educational Research,
80(3), 336–371. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310376953
20. Ceylan, S., & Ozdilek, Z. (2015). Improving a Sample Lesson Plan for Secondary
Science Courses within the STEM Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 177(July 2014), 223–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.395
21. Chng, L. S., & Lund, J. (2018). Assessment for Learning in Physical Education: The
What, Why and How. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 89(8),
29–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2018.1503119
22. Cigdemoglu, C., & Geban, O. (2015). Improving students’ chemical literacy levels on
thermochemical and thermodynamics concepts through a context-based approach.
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(2), 302–317.
https://doi.org/10.1039/c5rp00007f
23. Corlu, M. A., Aydin, E., Evaluation, E., Corlu, M. A., & Aydin, E. (2016). Evaluation of
Learning Gains Through Integrated STEM Projects To cite this article : Evaluation of
 Learning Gains through Integrated STEM Projects.
https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.35021
24. Darmaji, D., Kurniawan, D. A., & Irdianti, I. (2019). Physics education students’
science process skills. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education,
8(2), 293–298. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v8i2.28646
25. Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school students’ informal reasoning and
argumentation about biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy? International
Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421–1445.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801992870
26. Demirbag, M. (2014). Integrating Argument-Based Science Inquiry with Modal
Representations : Impact on Science Achievement , Argumentation , and Writing
Skills *. 14(1), 386–391. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.1632
27. Duda, H. J., Susilo, H., & Newcombe, P. (2019). Enhancing different ethnicity science
process skills: Problem-based learning through practicum and authentic assessment.
International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1207–1222.
https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12177a
28. Durmaz, H., & Mutlu, S. (2017). The effect of an instructional intervention on
elementary students’ science process skills. Journal of Educational Research, 110(4),
433–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2015.1118003
29. Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual,
epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268–291.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
30. Erduran, S., & Villamanan, R. (2009). Cool Argument: Engineering Students’ Written
Arguments about Thermodynamics in the Context of the Peltier Effect in
Refrigeration. Educación Química, 20(2), 119–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0187-
893x(18)30018-1
31. Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2005). THE ROLE OF ARGUMENTATION IN
DEVELOPING SCIENTIFIC LITERACY.
32. Etkina, E., Gregorcic, B., & Vokos, S. (2017). Organizing physics teacher professional
education around productive habit development: A way to meet reform challenges.
Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010107
33. Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2018). A Critical Review of Scientific
Argumentation in Science Education 1. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science
and Technology Education, 14(1), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
34. Farach, N., Kartimi, & Mulyani, A. (2021). Application of performance assessment in
STEM-based biological learning to improve student’s science process skills. Journal
of Physics: Conference Series, 1806(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1806/1/012220
35. Goedhart, M. J., & Kaper, W. (2002). Chapter 15 FROM CHEMICAL ENERGETICS TO
CHEMICAL THERMODYNAMICS.
36. GÜLEN, S., & YAMAN, S. (2019). The Effect of Integration of STEM Disciplines into
Toulmin’s Argumentation Model on Students’ Academic Achievement, Reflective
Thinking, and Psychomotor Skills*. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 16(2), 216–
230. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10276a
37. Gunawan, G., Harjono, A., Sahidu, H., Herayanti, L., Suranti, N. M. Y., & Yahya, F.
(2019). Using Virtual Laboratory to Improve Pre-service Physics Teachers’ Creativity
and Problem-Solving Skills on Thermodynamics Concept. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1280(5). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1280/5/052038
38. Guo, D., Zhang, S., Wright, K. L., & McTigue, E. M. (2020). Do You Get the Picture? A
Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Graphics on Reading Comprehension. AERA Open,
6(1), 233285842090169. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420901696
39. Hallström, J., & Schönborn, K. J. (2019). Models and modelling for authentic STEM
education: reinforcing the argument. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0178-z
40. Handayani, G., Adisyahputra, & Indrayanti, R. (2018). Hubungan Keterampilan
Proses Sains Terintegrasi dan Kemampuan Membaca Pemahaman Terhadap Literasi
Sains Pada Mahasiswa Calon Guru Biologi. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 11(1),
21–31.
41. Harlen, W., & Gardner, J. (2010). Assessment to support learning. Developing
teacher assessment.
42. Hartini, S., Thaybah, Mastuang, & Mahtari, S. (2018). Developing of Physics Learning
Material Based on Scientific Literacy to Train Scientific Process Skills. Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, 1097(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1097/1/012032
43. Hartono, & Oktafianto, W. R. (2014). Unnes Physics Education Journal. 3(1).
44. Heng, L. L., Surif, J., & Seng, C. H. (2014). Individual versus group argumentation:
Student’s performance in a Malaysian context. International Education Studies, 7(7),
109–124. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n7p109
45. Heng, L. L., Surif, J., & Seng, C. H. (2015). Malaysian Students’ Scientific
Argumentation: Do groups perform better than individuals? International Journal of
Science Education, 37(3), 505–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.995147
46. Hirca, N. (2012). The Influence of Hands on Physics Experiments on Scientific
Process Skills According to Prospective Teachers’ Experiences. European J Of Physics
Education, 4(1), 1–9. http://ejpe.erciyes.edu.tr/index.php/EJPE/article/view/82
47. Hodosyová, M., Útla, J., MonikaVanyová, Vnuková, P., & Lapitková, V. (2015). The
Development of Science Process Skills in Physics Education. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 186, 982–989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.184
48. Irwanto, Rohaeti, E., & Prodjosantoso, A. K. (2018). Undergraduate students’ science
process skills in terms of some variables: A perspective from Indonesia. Journal of
Baltic Science Education, 17(5), 751–764. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/18.17.751
49. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Designing Argumentation Learning Environments.
91–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_5
50. Jönsson, A. (2016). Student performance on argumentation task in the Swedish
National Assessment in science. International Journal of Science Education, 38(11),
1825–1840. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1218567
51. Jumadi, J., Perdana, R., Riwayani, & Rosana, D. (2021). The impact of problem-based
learning with argument mapping and online laboratory on scientific argumentation
skill. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(1), 16–23.
https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v10i1.20593
52. Kapon, S., Laherto, A., & Levrini, O. (2018). Disciplinary authenticity and personal
relevance in school science. Science Education, 102(5), 1077–1106.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21458
53. Kaya, V. H., Bahceci, D., & Altuk, Y. G. (2012). The Relationship Between Primary
School Students’ Scientific Literacy Levels and Scientific Process Skills. Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 495–500.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.687
54. Kizilaslan, A. (2019). The development of science process skills in visually impaired
students : analysis of the activities. 8(1), 90–96.
https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v8.i1.pp90-96
55. Köngül, Ö., & Yıldırım, M. (2021). Effects of STEM applications on the scientific
process skills and performance of secondary school students. Journal of Human
Sciences, 18(2), 159–184. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v18i2.6066
56. Kuhn, L., & Reiser, B. (2005). Scientific Explanations STUDENTS CONSTRUCTING AND
DEFENDING EVIDENCE-BASED SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS.
57. Lai, G. H. C. (2015). Seamless flipped learning : a mobile technology- enhanced
flipped classroom with effective learning strategies. Journal of Computers in
Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0043-0
58. Larsson, J., Airey, J., Danielsson, A. T., & Lundqvist, E. (2020). A Fragmented Training
Environment: Discourse Models in the Talk of Physics Teacher Educators. Research
in Science Education, 50(6), 2559–2585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9793-
9
59. Lee, H. S., Liu, O. L., Pallant, A., Roohr, K. C., Pryputniewicz, S., & Buck, Z. E. (2014).
Assessment of uncertainty-infused scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 51(5), 581–605. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21147
60. Lee, H., Chung, H. Q., Zhang, Y., Abedi, J., & Warschauer, M. (2020). The
Effectiveness and Features of Formative Assessment in US K-12 Education: A
 Systematic Review. Applied Measurement in Education, 33(2), 124–140.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2020.1732383
61. Levrini, O., Fantini, P., Pecori, B., & Tasquier, G. (2014). Forms of Productive
Complexity as Criteria for Educational Reconstruction: The Design of a Teaching
Proposal on Thermodynamics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1483–
1490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.421
62. Lin, S. S., & Mintzes, J. J. (2010). Learning Argumentation Skills Through Instruction
In Socioscientific Issues: The Effect Of Ability Level. International Journal of Science
and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 993–1017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-
9215-6
63. Lumbantoruan, A., Irawan, D., & Siregar, H. R. (2019). Science Process Skills in
Physics Practicum. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika-COMPTON, 6(2), 1–12.
64. Lumbantoruan, A., Irawan, D., Siregar, H. R., Lumbantoruan, D., Nasih, N. R.,
Samosir, S. C., Dewi, U. P., Putra, D. S., & Wiza, O. H. (2019). Identification of
students’ science process skills in Basic Physics Practicum II in using e-module. Jurnal
Riset Dan Kajian Pendidikan Fisika, 6(2), 49.
https://doi.org/10.12928/jrkpf.v6i2.14185
65. M Aulia, D., Parno, & Kusairi, S. (2021). Pengaruh E-moduleeBerbasis TPACK-
STEMterhadap Literasi Sains Alat Optik dengan Model PBL-STEM Disertai Asesmen
Formatif. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Fisika, 6(1), 7–12.
http://journal2.um.ac.id/index.php/jrpf/article/view/16404/8028
66. Maison, Darmaji, Aatalini, Kurniawan, D. A., Haryanto, Kurniawan, W., Suryani, A.,
Lumbantoruan, A., & Dewi, U. P. (2020). Science process skill in science program
higher education. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(2), 652–661.
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080238
67. Mulop, N., Yusof, K. M., & Tasir, Z. (2012). A Review on Enhancing the Teaching and
Learning of Thermodynamics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 56, 703–
712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.706
68. Mutlu, M., & Ka, B. (2013). Science process skills of students having field dependent
and field independent cognitive styles. 8(11), 766–776.
https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2012.1104
69. Nababan, N. P., Nasution, D., & Jayanti, R. D. (2019). The Effect of Scientific Inquiry
Learning Model and Scientific Argumentation on the Students’ Science Process Skill.
Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1155(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1155/1/012064
70. Nottis, K. E. K., Prince, M. J., & Vigeant, M. A. (2010). US-China Education Review
(Vol. 7, Issue 2).
71. Nugraha, M. G., Utari, S., Saepuzaman, D., & Nugraha, F. (2018). Redesign of
students’ worksheet on basic physics experiment based on students’ scientific
 process skills analysis in Melde’s law. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1013(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1013/1/012038
72. Ongowo, R. O., & Indoshi, F. C. (2013). Science Process Skills in the Kenya Certificate
of Secondary Education Biology Practical Examinations. Creative Education, 04(11),
713–717. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.411101
73. Ozkul, H., & Ozden, M. (2020). Education and Science. 45(204), 41–63.
https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2020.8870
74. Passmore, C. M., & Svoboda, J. (2012). Exploring Opportunities for Argumentation in
Modelling Classrooms Exploring Opportunities for Argumentation in Modelling
Classrooms. November 2014, 37–41.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.577842
75. Pateliya, Y. P., Journal, I., & Vol, E. (2013). Research Method of Qualitative
Research : ‘ Case Study .’ 2(1), 116–120.
76. Perdana, R., Jumadi, J., & Rosana, D. (2019). Relationship between Analytical
Thinking Skill and Scientific Argumentation Using PBL with Interactive CK 12
Simulation. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences, 1(1).
https://interactives.ck12.org/simulations/physics.html.
77. PISA. (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): Vol. I. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-
en
78. Pratiwi, S. N., Cari, C., Aminah, N. S., & Affandy, H. (2019). Problem-Based Learning
with Argumentation Skills to Improve Students’ Concept Understanding. Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, 1155(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1155/1/012065
79. Psycharis, S. (2016). The Impact of Computational Experiment and Formative
Assessment in Inquiry-Based Teaching and Learning Approach in STEM Education.
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 316–326.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9595-z

80. Rachmatya, R., & Supardiyono, N. (2020). HE CORRELATION OF SCIENTIFIC

ARGUMENTATION AND CRITICAL THINKING ON GLOBAL WARMING MATERIALS IN
SMAN 19 SURABAYA. IPF: Inovasi Pendidikan Fisika, 09(02).
81. Rauf, R. A. A., Rasul, M. S., Mansor, A. N., Othman, Z., & Lyndon, N. (2013).
Inculcation of science process skills in a science classroom. Asian Social Science,
9(8), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n8p47
82. Ryu, M. (2018). Preservice teachers ’ experiences of STEM integration : challenges
and implications for integrated STEM teacher preparation. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9440-9
83. Sam, H. K., & George Tan, G. S. (2011). The Effectiveness of Collaborative Learning In
The Teaching of Form Four Mathematical Reasoning. Jurnal Teknologi, 55, 55–73.
https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v55.81
84. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2011). A Comparison of the Collaborative Scientific
Argumentation Practices of Two High and Two Low Performing Groups. 63–97.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9146-9
85. Sari, F. P., Ratnaningtyas, L., Wilujeng, I., Jumadi, & Kuswanto, H. (2019).
Development of Android Comics media on Thermodynamic Experiment to Map the
Science Process Skill for Senior High School. Journal of Physics: Conference Series,
1233(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012052
86. Saricayir, H., Ay, S., Comek, A., Cansiz, G., & Uce, M. (2016). Determining Students’
Conceptual Understanding Level of Thermodynamics. Journal of Education and
Training Studies, 4(6), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i6.1421
87. Siahaan, P., Suryani, A., Kaniawati, I., Suhendi, E., & Samsudin, A. (2017). Improving
Students ’ Science Process Skills through Simple Computer Simulations on Linear
Motion Conceptions Improving Students ’ Science Process Skills through Simple
Computer Simulations on Linear Motion Conceptions.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/755/1/011001
88. Sinensis, A. R., Firman, H., Hamidah, I., & Muslim, M. (2019). Reconstruction of
collaborative problem solving based learning in thermodynamics with the aid of
interactive simulation and derivative games. Journal of Physics: Conference Series,
1157(3). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/3/032042
89. Smith, T. I., Christensen, W. M., Mountcastle, D. B., & Thompson, J. R. (2015).
Identifying student difficulties with entropy, heat engines, and the Carnot cycle.
Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 11(2).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.11.020116
90. Strong, M. G. (2013). Developing Elementary Math and Science Process Skills
Through Engineering Design Instruction. International Migration Review, 47(2), 330-
373. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/imre.12028/abstract
91. Sugiarti, & Ratnaningdyah, D. (2020). IMPROVEMENT OF SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS
THROUGH DISCOVERY. 5(2), 69–74.
92. Sukarno, A. P., & Hamidah, I. (2013). Science Teacher Understanding to Science
Process Skills and Implications for Science Learning at Junior High School ( Case
Study in Jambi ). 2(6), 2–6.
93. Sullivan, F. R. (2008). Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process
skills and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3),
373–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20238
94. Tanu Wijaya, T., Ying, Z., Chotimah, S., Bernard, M., Zulfah, & Astuti. (2020).
Hawgent dynamic mathematic software as mathematics learning media for teaching
quadratic functions. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1592(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1592/1/012079
95. Tolga, G. (2015). An investigation of students’ performance after peer instruction
with stepwise problem-solving strategies. International Journal of Science and
Mathematics Education, 13(3), 561–582.
96. Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge university press.
97. Tsai, C. Y. (2015). Improving Students’ PISA Scientific Competencies Through Online
Argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 37(2), 321–339.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.987712
98. Tseng, K. H., Chang, C. C., Lou, S. J., & Chen, W. P. (2013). Attitudes towards science,
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in a project-based learning (PjBL)
environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(1), 87–
102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9160-x
99. Wang, J., & Buck, G. A. (2016). Understanding a High School Physics Teacher’s
Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Argumentation. Journal of Science Teacher
Education, 27(5), 577–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9476-1
100. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Stroupe, D. (2012). Proposing a
Core Set of Instructional Practices and Tools for Teachers of Science.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21027
101. Yuenyong, C., & Narjaikaew, P. (2009). Scientific literacy and thailand
science education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education,
4(3), 335–349.
102. Yuliati, L., Fauziah, R., & Hidayat, A. (2018). Student’s critical thinking skills
in authentic problem based learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1013(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1013/1/012025
103. Yuliskurniawati, I. D., Noviyanti, N. I., & Mukti, W. R. (2019). Science Process
Skills Based on Genders of High School Students Science Process Skills Based on
Genders of High School Students. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1241/1/012055
104. Zeidan, A. H., & Jayosi, M. R. (2014). Science Process Skills and Attitudes
toward Science among Palestinian Secondary School Students. World Journal of
Education, 5(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v5n1p13
105. Zeitoun, S., & Hajo, Z. (2015). Investigating the Science Process Skills in Cycle
3 National Science Textbooks in Lebanon. 3(3), 268–275.
https://doi.org/10.12691/education-3-3-3
106. Zhang, H., Fiszman, M., Shin, D., Miller, C. M., Rosemblat, G., & Rindflesch,
T. C. (2011). Degree centrality for semantic abstraction summarization of
therapeutic studies. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 44(5), 830–838.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2011.05.001
107. Zorlu, F., & Zorlu, Y. (2017). Comparison of Science Process Skills with Stem
Career Interests of Middle School Students. Universal Journal of Educational
Research, 5(12), 2117–2124. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.051201